not a flame bait. just saying... the first boss fight in Batman AO was a lot more fun than DS fights. you had adds, dodging, blocking, batarangs etc. IMO responsive fluent combat will always be better than slow clunky combat. same goes for controls. Blizzard games have the most responsive engines, other games could potentially be better, but they just feel heavy and slow. Not to mention my DS avatar can't jump properly, things like this completely break immersion for me. DS2 combat feels awkward, slow, heavy. It's not even hard. Oh, target switching is terrible compared to Batman games. Overall I'd say DS is so massively overhyped. I'm with Veteran on this one, the games are ok, but they feel like 1990's games. Stale.
the combat, yes. what's wrong with that? both are 3rd person games, best played with a controller. Batman is a lot more fun for me. and it has more advanced combat. It's more responsive, controls feel better, there's dodging, combos, different mechanics, it's paced better. IMO it plays a lot better than DS games.
Batman is button bashing, dark souls makes you commit to each hit. Also DS combat is very dependent on stats and weapon choice you are free to build a fast ninja with a katana (or 2) with high agility or build a more standard sword and shield type who can tank hits more. Honestly not many games come close to the depth of souls games combat.
Sure, DS has the gear side of things, being an RPG. But when it comes to actual combat, it just plays meh. To each their own. BTW, I wouldn't call DS combat deep. It's actually very straight forward a simple. Compared to some other games I've played over the years.
I know you are not, but just saying expect some eyebrows to be raised at that comparison. And game engines? Engines shouldn't affect responsiveness of a game's control anymore unless the engines is so ****ed that it can't even take device input properly. It all boils down to game design and I would argue that Souls series needs this kind of what you would call 'bad' control to appeal to its audience. It's kind of like how survival horror games have lackluster combat design, or how in tactical shooters you can't bunny hop and land headshots across the map (even though the ability to do so clearly demonstrates more responsive control). It is all about having the right kind of restraints that make sense in the context of the game to deliver overall coherent experience. Souls series is about managing through an oppressive world. Clunky character control reinforce that atmosphere very well IMO. If your character could do backflips and other acrobatic moves in souls game that would seriously just break the game because it would clash with everything else about the game.
I don't think you have played it enough tbh to judge the combat on a whole. Dodging and combos are also big parts of the souls games with each weapon set having their own unique combos. Then we have parring and countering which is also a big part of the combat especially in pvp it's deep man and hard to master in top end pvp. It's ok not liking the games they are definitely not for everyone but honestly they are beautiful
I have not! Well then I just have to add to what I said... I should've said "starting with". And that backflip from what I can see is still on the line of Souls character movement and would be clunky for more action oriented titles.
you know i see gameplay about darksouls 1 and 2 and everyone talks how great these games are....but the gameplay and controls look like complete ****. the game is probably hard for that reason.....
Apples and oranges. Having played a lot of both franchises, the Batman games definitely feel more responsive. It is undoubtedly flashier. But that's because I hit a button to make batman block a hit, then another button to destroy them, then another button for a coup de grace. Three hits and ol' Bruce pummels someone into the dirt. Moreover, I can kinda hit those buttons whenever and it all still proceeds as expected. Dark Souls is more about precision. I think that people confuse "less responsive" with this style of fighter, which is where you are locked in to whatever action you trigger. That's the design. You can button mash all you want while that R2 you triggered too early is swinging towards the target; that boss is still going to flatten you. You made the decision to attack at the wrong time and you're really going to pay for it. The fact that it's a certain action game design philosophy doesn't make it bad on its face. I think Dark Souls 1 and 2 are very well made examples of this style. It requires more skill to be really good at. For example, in Dark Souls 1 I mainly wore heavy armor with a huge shield and blocked everything. Even Kalameet and Artorias were easy. Beat Artorias on my first try. But I was slow. In Dark Souls 2, I learned to dodge and to take advantage of invincibility frames. If you learn the timing, you can roll directly through any attack and take no damage. So now I wear very little armor and walk straight up to Smelter and other big bosses and take no damage unless I mess up. Batman doesn't really allow for more than one playstyle. Block and proceed t to murder or maybe air drop and proceed to murder. Dark Souls allows for a lot of variation in your approach to the game's challenges, and has a much steeper risk/reward curve. Neither game is going to be to everybody's taste. No use arguing about it.
Because unlike real life game controls are about abstraction and games like Dark Soul weren't about realism in the first place. Seriously though, realism card man? WTF? How is anything you do in either Dark Souls or Batman games remotely realistic?
I feel I've wasted my money on this game. Definitely not my type of game. While I appreciate the difficulty, sometimes it just seems unfair.
You can? Having handled swords I'd say it's really hard to stop a swing in real life. It takes a LOT of practice to do well, and that's with a iaito, which is like a feather compared to the weight of a broadsword for example. Not to mention the momentum heavy armour can add. But I get what you're saying. The combat in the modern Batman games is really fluid and flashy, but I find the batman games to be very boring and unchallenging. Dark Souls however, requires you to have patience and knowledge of what your own powers are and what the opponents strengths and weaknesses are. In Batman I can go in fists blazing an mash my way through, which gets old really fast. To each his own though, these are design choices, not flaws. Some people love batman games, some like Dark Souls games. If the Dark Souls games were more like Batman, I probably wouldn't like them. And don't get me started on realism, if games were like real life, I probably wouldn't play them
I'm not saying either is realistic. It's just that combat in ds is slow and clunky. More tactical, yes. It's not my cup of tea and I don't get the praise it gets when to me it just feels heavy and cumbersome and definitely nothing to write home about. Even you guys only rate it because it's more tactical, it seems. It's not enough for me personally, that's all
When you put it that way Des i think im going to give it another try when maybe more modifications are out. The gameplay does sound good if i can get into it. Saying that i do agree with eclap on first impressions 100% like sthe shoddy jumping and the stock graphics looked poor even for a console imo. Infact 10 mins was enough to put me off for good but maybe i need to look at the broarder picture and try it again.
True enough, but I haven't ever seen any game with realistic knife fighting (don't know if such a thing could work that well) And using your fists against enemies with swords or leather armor and better is a bit useless
Check this vid out Vet, some decent info about the game mechanics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayDrTngtGL0
